HHO production with Millwatts a la Stan Meyer

[JimBoot]

Hi guys this is rain water out of my tanks no electrolyte. From what I can tell this is pretty good. Hope to improve on it though. https://youtu.be/e_a1QhR1kXM Pulsing dc. Input 14v 60ma. A good one to open source I think?

[JimBoot]

Need some help working these numbers out. With one small cathode I can produce about 1 millilitre in 30mins on approx 1w (just eyeballing at this stage.) Standard production seems to be 1 litre takes 50kwh.

So 2 millilitres per wh. I guess that means 1 litre takes 0.5kwh? 100X better? Is that how it works?

[Smudge]

Yes your math is correct.
Smudge

[PhysicsProf]

Hi guys this is rain water out of my tanks no electrolyte. From what I can tell this is pretty good. Hope to improve on it though. https://youtu.be/e_a1QhR1kXM Pulsing dc. Input 14v 60ma. A good one to open source I think?

Off to a good start, JimBoot!  I like it.
"Using nano pulses in rain water. No electrolyte added.
More soon."

Can you tell us how you generate your "nano pulses" efficiently?

[JimBoot]

Thanks smudge, I'll make it a goal. Steve I'm using Nelson Rochas pulser circuit with some mods.

[Paul-R]

Off to a good start, JimBoot!  I like it.
"Using nano pulses in rain water. No electrolyte added.

Rainwater is often an electrolyte. acid rain etc. What is its pH ?>

[JimBoot]

Ph is high. Works with bottle water have not tested distilled. Waiting on some more parts. Will have more to show on the weekend I hope. Now I understand how different this is to standard electrolysis and more closely resembles what Stan Meyer was doing, I'll get serious about it. I think we'd all appreciate his dune buggy atm. Also needed to confirm 2ml an hour is a worth pursuing.

[picowatt]

Need some help working these numbers out. With one small cathode I can produce about 1 millilitre in 30mins on approx 1w (just eyeballing at this stage.) Standard production seems to be 1 litre takes 50kwh.

So 2 millilitres per wh. I guess that means 1 litre takes 0.5kwh? 100X better? Is that how it works?

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but, for a practical/commercial electrolyzer, I believe that's 50kWh to produce 1 kg of H2, which, at STP, is around 11.2 cubic meters of H2 (39.2 kWh/kg for 100% efficiency).  The O2 produced (if not separated) would add, roughly, another 5.6 cubic meters for around 16.8 cubic meters of gas (HHO) produced per 50kWh.

So, at STP, 1Wh would yield around 336ml of HHO (16.8 cubic meters/50000), or, if the gases are separated, 224ml of H2 and 112 ml of O2 (a 100% efficient electrolyser would yield closer to 428ml of HHO per 1Wh).

Having my AM coffee, so please check my work...

PW

[Paul-R]

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but, for a practical/commercial electrolyzer, I believe that's 50kWh to produce 1 kg of H2, which, at STP, is around 11.2 cubic meters of H2 (39.2 kWh/kg for 100% efficiency).  The O2 produced (if not separated) would add, roughly, another 5.6 cubic meters for around 16.8 cubic meters of gas (HHO) produced per 50kWh.

So, at STP, 1Wh would yield around 336ml of HHO (16.8 cubic meters/50000), or, if the gases are separated, 224ml of H2 and 112 ml of O2 (a 100% efficient electrolyser would yield closer to 428ml of HHO per 1Wh).

Having my AM coffee, so please check my work...

PW

Is this Faraday electrolyser thinking? Pulsing changes the mathematics and going in with exotic frequencies yet again.

[picowatt]

Is this Faraday electrolyser thinking? Pulsing changes the mathematics and going in with exotic frequencies yet again.

50-55 kWh per 1 kg of hydrogen is often quoted for a practical/commercial grade electrolyzer that may require the use of specific electrolytes, elevated temperature and/or pressure, and the use of catalysts to achieve that roughly 78% efficiency.  Some of the newer technologies using nano materials can exceed that given efficiency but are still less than 100%.

If pulsing or the use of exotic frequencies can achieve higher efficiency, it must exceed the numbers provided.

PW 

[Centraflow]

50-55 kWh per 1 kg of hydrogen is often quoted for a practical/commercial grade electrolyzer that may require the use of specific electrolytes, elevated temperature and/or pressure, and the use of catalysts to achieve that roughly 78% efficiency.  Some of the newer technologies using nano materials can exceed that given efficiency but are still less than 100%.

If pulsing or the use of exotic frequencies can achieve higher efficiency, it must exceed the numbers provided.

PW

Hi PW

You can get over 100% for the production of hydrogen only by using the oxygen to oxidate (charge) the power source cathode, as in recharging a rechargeable battery.

Careful on what is 100%

Regards

Mike

P.S. It's not rocket science, like a lot of things it is right in front of peoples faces, and the best way to hide it

[picowatt]

Hi PW

You can get over 100% for the production of hydrogen only by using the oxygen to oxidate (charge) the power source cathode, as in recharging a rechargeable battery.

Careful on what is 100%

Regards

Mike

P.S. It's not rocket science, like a lot of things it is right in front of peoples faces, and the best way to hide it

Sure, but then you are having to sacrificially oxidize something, such as aluminum, and the energy required to produce/de-oxidize/regenerate that material must be figured into the efficiency numbers. 

Also, Jimboot is doing fairly simple electrolysis, unless one of his electrodes is aluminum...

PW

[Centraflow]

Sure, but then you are having to sacrificially oxidize something, such as aluminum, and the energy required to produce/de-oxidize/regenerate that material must be figured into the efficiency numbers. 

Also, Jimboot is doing fairly simple electrolysis, unless one of his electrodes is aluminum...

PW

Yes, that is right to a certain point. It could be even iron, scrap iron, for example, anything that will oxidate and with a counter electrode that produces hydrogen.

As you know nothing comes for free, but this is about paying the minimum, and if you can use 33% less electricity and produce clean hydrogen from scrap metal, so be it. I produced a video of this and I was using nickel oxide hydride at the time. But even stainless steel will work but needs a stronger electrolyte.

Anyway, Stan Meyer's car runs on very little hydrogen as an input of gas, you might say it runs on electron extraction, his favorite words and no I'm not mad as the main consensus of people on this form think I have changed my outlook on this or any forum as people just can't be trusted. PW that was not pointed at you, well I hope not.

My last post on this thread, I just had to make my point on running an engine on water.

Regards

Mike

[picowatt]

Some time ago, Renault (I believe it was Renault) produced a prototype of an automobile that used a spool fed aluminum wire arcing against a rotating stainless steel drum while submerged in a water based electrolyte to produce H2.  The electrolyte was circulated thru a filter to remove/separate the resultant aluminum oxide.  It produced enough H2 to operate the vehicle "on water" , but the energy required to produce/recycle/de-oxidize the aluminum made the overall process inefficient from an energy perspective.

Currently, aluminum air batteries are under consideration for use as a range extender for EV's, wherein once discharged, the resultant aluminum oxide would be recycled back into aluminum.  The process is currently a bit costly, but an Al/air battery can be very energy dense and held in reserve almost indefinitely until the additional range is required.   

PW

[JimBoot]

Both electrodes are ss. I've only been working on this for about 25 hours so I'm confident I can get it a lot more efficient. I've gone through about 20 tip122.

[JimBoot]

Thanks smudge, I'll make it a goal. Steve I'm using Nelson Rochas pulser circuit with some mods.

having trouble replicating the results in this vid. My main difference to Nelson's circuit is that I replaced to toroid with two 5ohm coils with a common core. The same ones I used in brads motor. I still get gas production but need a few watts to get the same volume in in the vid.

[JimBoot]

I seem to be on the right path. Was watching this last night. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLbptbbwtMc apparently Stan was also using a pulsed transformer. The cell is a capacitor in his circuit so I need to work out what chokes to use with my cell. I was still getting bubbles at 800mw just not the same volume as in the first vid.

Stan had a choke on both the + & - . How does that change the inductance value? Are the two values added together?  thanks

[Kator01]

Hello Jim,

you may have a look at these Video-Series by Valentin Petkov

(3)Searching the Resonant frequency of Water cell

#3 is very interesting, as it shows at some point in his search-process a waveform which I have seen in plasma-dicharges of a small neon-bulb, that means there is a point in his testing-process where he gets a negative-differential-resistance.

But I would suggest to watch all three presentations.

This here is part 3. Just noticed he removed the numbering  from the title, but he listed the previous vids in the description below

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uz8Zm-PG6hA

I have to add a remark: in his approach he is using a very elaborated electronic design which is different to the nanopuls-technique.
If you ever get a nanopuls with your circuit you might loose a lot of energy with this kind of surface-area of your electrodes arrangement. The harmonics up to the 20th  will spread and sink into all nearby surfaces before the puls ever reaches the point of its destination.

I would recommend a small tube design rod diameter 5 mm. tube inner diameter 9 mm 100 to 150 mm long, negativ puls on the rod.
In this way rf-harmonics are concentrated within the tube.

regards

Mike_G ( Germany)

Edit 12th of April:

In the attached document you can see in figure 7 what is left of an applied nanopuls . Also I wonder why they made the center-rod the anode because for electrons to escape a negativ surface-area the bending should have a small radius...the smaller the better ( point discharge)

[JimBoot]

Hello Jim,

you may have a look at these Video-Series by Valentin Petkov

(3)Searching the Resonant frequency of Water cell

#3 is very interesting, as it shows at some point in his search-process a waveform which I have seen in plasma-dicharges of a small neon-bulb, that means there is a point in his testing-process where he gets a negative-differential-resistance.

But I would suggest to watch all three presentations.

This here is part 3. Just noticed he removed the numbering  from the title, but he listed the previous vids in the description below

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uz8Zm-PG6hA

I have to add a remark: in his approach he is using a very elaborated electronic design which is different to the nanopuls-technique.
If you ever get a nanopuls with your circuit you might loose a lot of energy with this kind of surface-area of your electrodes arrangement. The harmonics up to the 20th  will spread and sink into all nearby surfaces before the puls ever reaches the point of its destination.

I would recommend a small tube design rod diameter 5 mm. tube inner diameter 9 mm 100 to 150 mm long, negativ puls on the rod.
In this way rf-harmonics are concentrated within the tube.

regards

Mike_G ( Germany)

Edit 12th of April:

In the attached document you can see in figure 7 what is left of an applied nanopuls . Also I wonder why they made the center-rod the anode because for electrons to escape a negativ surface-area the bending should have a small radius...the smaller the better ( point discharge)

thanks Mike, just waiting on parts. Good explanations. I'll let yo7 know how I go